Gardens' Bulletin Singapore 71 (1): 1–44. 2019 1 doi: 10.26492/gbs71(1).2019-01 Flora of Singapore precursors, 6: Typification of grass names relevant to the flora of Singapore I.M. Turner1, 2, D.J. Middleton2, H. Duistermaat3 & J.F. Veldkamp3 1Singapore Botanical Liaison Officer, Royal Botanic Gardens Kew, Richmond, Surrey TW9 3AE, UK [email protected] 2Singapore Botanic Gardens, National Parks Board, 1 Cluny Road, 259569 Singapore 3Naturalis Biodiversity Center section Botany P.O. Box 9517, 2300 RA, Leiden The Netherlands ABSTRACT. The typification of more than 200 names of grass taxa relevant to the flora of Singapore is reviewed. A total of 52 lectotype designations are made here, including 22 which are posthumously published by the late J.F. Veldkamp. In addition, 13 second-step lectotypes (one by JFV), and two neotypes are designated. An earlier place of publication than generally cited for the combination Zizania latifolia is highlighted. Keywords. Gramineae, lectotype, Poaceae, Singapore, typification Introduction In November 2017, Jan Frederik [Jan-Frits or JeF] Veldkamp died at the age of 76 (Baas & Hovenkamp, 2018). For almost 50 years he had been the leading expert on the systematics of the grass family in the Malesian region. One of many projects in which he had agreed to collaborate was the Flora of Singapore, building on the work of Duistermaat (2005). Unfortunately, his death came before the family account for the Flora was completed, leaving a number of typifications for taxa included in the account unresolved. We have investigated these issues and present here a series of typifications. In some cases, lectotypes were indicated by Veldkamp in the unpublished manuscript and where we have found no reason to reject these choices (e.g. earlier typifications found or failure to locate the specimens indicated by Veldkamp) we include them here as lectotypes ‘designated here by Veldkamp’. Veldkamp listed holotypes for many of the names in the manuscript. We have reviewed all such designations, as names validated before 1952 rarely have holotypes (McNeill, 2014), and have concluded that many of these either require lectotypification or have already been previously lectotypified. When it is not entirely certain whether specimens are duplicates of a holotype or lectotype, but it is likely they are, these are indicated as ‘possible isotype(s)’ or ‘possible isolectotype(s)’. The term ‘fragment’ is used here to indicate that the 2 Gard. Bull. Singapore 71 (1) 2019 specimen is small or limited and probably a piece taken from another type specimen. Under the ICN (Turland et al., 2018) (Art. 8 Ex. 8) these fragments are to be treated as duplicates. We include the basionyms or replaced synonyms of all names from the draft Flora of Singapore manuscript, either as the current name or as a synonym. The names are listed alphabetically with the accepted name indicated below if it differs from the basionym. Names now treated as synonyms are given in italics, accepted names in bold italics. Synonyms are not extensively cited here. Inclusion of taxa in the list should not be taken as making a definite statement on their presence as native or naturalised species in Singapore. List of grass names 1. Acroceras sparsum Stapf ex Ridl., Fl. Malay Penins. 5: 229 (1925). – TYPE: Peninsular Malaysia, Selangor, Klang Gates below the ridge near the river, 2 January 1921, H.N. Ridley s.n. (lectotype K [K000290363], designated here). = Acroceras tonkinense (Balansa) C.E.Hubb. ex Bor, Indian Forest Rec. 1: 78 (1938). 2. Agrostis diandra Retz., Observ. Bot. 5: 19 (1788). – TYPE: J. König s.n. [annot. ‘Cinna diandra N.’] (lectotype LD [LD1215317], designated by Fischer, Bull. Misc. Inform. Kew 1932: 73 (1932); possible isolectotypes BM[2 sheets], C[5 sheets]). = Sporobolus indicus (L.) R.Br. var. flaccidus (Roth) Veldkamp, Blumea 35: 433 (1991). 3. Agrostis elongata (R.Br.) Roth var. flaccida Roth in Roem. & Schult., Syst. Veg. 2: 368 (1817). – TYPE: India orientali, Roth 80β (lectotype BM [BM000959534], designated by Baaijens & Veldkamp, Blumea 35: 433 (1991); possible isolectotype LE [Herb. Trinius 1699.1]). = Sporobolus indicus (L.) R.Br. var. flaccidus (Roth) Veldkamp, Blumea 35: 433 (1991). 4. Agrostis fertilis Steud., Syn. Pl. Glumac. 1: 170 (1854). – TYPE: Japan, Burger s.n. (lectotype L [L0050179], designated by Baaijens, Blumea 35: 437 (1991); possible isolectotypes L [L0050181], ? P). = Sporobolus indicus (L.) R.Br. var. major (Buse) Baaijens, Blumea 35: 437 (1991). 5. Agrostis indica L., Sp. Pl. 1: 63 (1753). – TYPE: [Clayton] 460-B (lectotype LINN [Herb. Linn. 84.36], designated by C.E. Hubbard, Agron. Lusit. 28: [67] (1967)). = Sporobolus indicus (L.) R.Br., Prodr. 1: 170 (1810). Typication of grasses for Flora of Singapore 3 6. Agrostis matrella L., Mant. Pl. Altera 185 (1771). – TYPE: J.G. König 56 (lectotype LINN [Herb. Linn. 84.11], designated by Goudswaard, Blumea 26: 171 (1980); possible isolectotypes L [L0050867], LE [Herb. Trinius 396.1]). = Zoysia matrella (L.) Merr., Philipp. J. Sci. 7: 230 (1912). 7. Agrostis maxima Roxb., Fl. Ind. 1: 319 (1820). – TYPE: W. Roxburgh s.n. (lectotype G [G00418718], designated here). = Thysanolaena latifolia (Roxb. ex Hornem.) Honda, J. Fac. Sci. Univ. Tokyo, Sect. 3, Bot. 3: 312 (1930). Notes. The lectotype specimen in Geneva has an original ticket in Roxburgh’s hand saying Agrostis diandra with the epithet crossed out and replaced with maxima. 8. Agrostis procera Retz., Observ. Bot. 4: 19 (1786). – TYPE: J.G. König s.n. (lectotype LD [LD1215977], designated by Fischer, Bull. Misc. Inform. Kew 1932: 71 (1932); isolectotype BRI (fragment), K (fragment) [K000958820]). = Eriochloa procera (Retz.) C.E.Hubb., Bull. Misc. Inform. Kew 1930: 256 (1930). 9. Aira indica L., Sp. Pl. 1: [1231] (1753). – TYPE: Sri Lanka, Sabaragamuwa Province, Ratnapura District, 11 miles E. of Daniyaya along Highway 17 to Ratnapura, near mile post 62, 22 October 1974, G. Davidse 7871 (neotype K [K000245262], designated by Renvoize in Cafferty et al., Taxon 49: 244 (2000); isoneotypes L, MO [MO-1410733]). = Sacciolepis indica (L.) Chase, Proc. Biol. Soc. Washington 21: 8 (1908). 10. Andropogon L. sect. Amphilophis Trin., Mém. Acad. Imp. Sci. St.-Pétersbourg, Sér. 6, Sci. Math. 2: 285 (rank indicated p. 279) (1832). – TYPE: Andropogon laguroides DC. [= Bothriochloa laguroides (DC.) Herter] (lectotype designated here by Veldkamp). 11. Andropogon aciculatus Retz., Observ. Bot. 5: 22. (1789), as ‘aciculatum’. – TYPE: J.G. König s.n. (lectotype LD [LD1224666], designated by Veldkamp, Austrobaileya 5: 509 (1999)). = Chrysopogon aciculatus (Retz.) Trin., Fund. Agrost. 188 (1820). 4 Gard. Bull. Singapore 71 (1) 2019 12. Andropogon affinis J.Presl in C.Presl, Reliq. Haenk. 1: 343 (1830), nom. illeg., non R.Br. (1810). – Andropogon propinquus Kunth, Enum. Pl. 1: 502 (1833). – TYPE: T.P.X. Haenke s.n. (lectotype PR [sheet no. 612301], designated here; isolectotypes PRC [PRC450151], US (fragment)). = Sorghum propinquum (Kunth) Hitchc., Lingnan Sci. J. 7: 249 (1931). 13. Andropogon amaurus Buse, Gram. 20 (Feb 1854); Buse in Miq., Pl. Jungh. 3: 360 (Aug 1854). – TYPE: Java, H. Zollinger 539 (lectotype L [L0050026], designated by Veldkamp, Blumea 36: 180 (1991); isolectotypes G, K, P[3 sheets]). = Polytrias indica (Houtt.) Veldkamp, Blumea 36: 180 (1991). 14. Andropogon annulatus Forssk., Fl. Aegypt.-Arab. 173 (1775), as ‘annulatum’. – TYPE: Egypt, P. Forsskål 127 (lectotype C [C10001661], designated by Blake, Proc. Roy. Soc. Queensland 80: 65 (1969); isolectotype LD). = Dichanthium annulatum (Forssk.) Stapf, Fl. Trop. Afr. 9: 178 (1917). 15. Andropogon barbatus L., Mant. Pl. Altera 302 (1771), as ‘barbatum’, nom. illeg., non L. (1759). – TYPE: Anon. s.n. (lectotype LINN [Herb. Linn. 1211.21], designated by Judziewicz, Fl. Guianas, ser. A, Phanerogams 8: 136 (1990)). = Chloris barbata Sw., Fl. Ind. Occid. 1: 200 (1797). 16. Andropogon bladhii Retz., Observ. Bot. 2: 27 (1781). – TYPE: China, P.J. Bladh s.n. (lectotype LD [LD1218006], designated by Blake, Proc. Roy. Soc. Queensland 80: 62 (1969)). = Bothriochloa bladhii (Retz.) S.T. Blake, Proc. Roy. Soc. Queensland 80: 62 (1969). 17. Andropogon brevifolius Sw., Prodr. 26 (1788). – TYPE: Jamaica, O. Swartz s.n. (lectotype M [M-0090295], designated by Hitchcock, Contr. U.S. Natl. Herb. 12: 143 (1908), excluding the portion which is Andropogon leucostachys; isolectotypes BM, S). = Schizachyrium brevifolium (Sw.) Nees in Mart., Fl. Bras. Enum. Pl. 2: 332 (1829). Notes. Hitchcock (1908) believed that there was no original material of this taxon in the Stockholm Herbarium and effectively selected material in Munich as the type. There is actually an extant Swartz specimen in Stockholm. Typication of grasses for Flora of Singapore 5 18. Andropogon caricosus L., Sp. Pl., ed. 2, 2: 1480 (1763), as ‘caricosum’, nom. cons. – CONSERVED TYPE: Peninsula Ind. Orientalis, Herb. Wight Propr. No. 1687 (holotype K [K001050468]; possible isotype E). = Dichanthium caricosum (L.) A.Camus, Bull. Mus. Natl. Hist. Nat. 27: 549 (1921). 19. Andropogon cerifer Hack., Fl. Bras. (Martius) 2(3): 281 (1883), as ‘ceriferus’. – TYPE: Brazil, Rio de Janeiro, pr. Piqura, A.F.M. Glaziou 4296 (holotype W [W1904-0010930]; isotype US [US00156603] (fragment)). = Cymbopogon citratus (DC.) Stapf, Bull. Misc. Inform. Kew 1906: 322 (1906). 20. Andropogon citratus DC., Cat. Pl. Horti Monsp. 78 (1813), as ‘citratum’. – TYPE: Cult. in Horto Monspeliensis (not traced). = Cymbopogon citratus (DC.) Stapf, Bull. Misc. Inform. Kew 1906: 322 (1906). Notes: Stapf (1906: 322–335) provided a detailed history of lemon-grass and its taxonomy. He concluded that Andropogon citratus DC. was the oldest name available for the species and made the requisite combination in Cymbopogon. 21. Andropogon contortus L., Sp. Pl. 2: 1045 (1753), as ‘contortum’. – TYPE: [published illustration] ‘Gram. Secalinum, Indicum, spica gracili, tomentoso, aristis longioribus, ad se invicem intortis’, Plukenet, Phytogr. 4: t. 191, f. 5 (1692) (lectotype designated by Cope, Fl. Pakistan 143: 312 (1982)). = Heteropogon contortus (L.) P. Beauv. ex Roem. & Schult., Syst.